This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: asm issues




  > Actually I see now that my remarks, too, underrated decent points-to
  > analysis. There is no particular reason why (*foo) can't be kept in a
  > register by an intelligent enough compiler, and I know for a fact that
  > there are compilers that routinely do it.
gcc is among those compilers.  Though it's support for this kind of thing
isn't as aggressive as other compilers.  Expect that to be changing :-)

  > To summarize: I don't (think I) like volatile as a means of forcing no
  > copy-in/copy-out because I don't yet see a complete correspondence
  > between that usage and the semantics of volatile in other
  > circumstances. I also don't like using anything in the constraints to
  > specify whether copy-in/copy-out is allowed.
We don't have a lot of ways to pass this kind of information to an asm....

Seems to me you have to use one or the other.  This is kind of what we've
used volatile for for years...

jeff


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]